luxfelix

Plus, I imagine it would be more efficient and enjoyable to live in a free society (where your neighbors respect NAP etc.). That, in turn, is likely to attract others to learn about the benefits of peaceful parenting. Even if this process occurs slowly within a state, that state will eventually cease to exist as there are no more people willing to replace soldiers, politicians, and other positions in the bureaucracy. In this way, it seems that a free society is the natural environment, with a temporary cancer of violence that further withers away with each root we sever from the heart of a child (within ourselves and others).

I came across similar arguments against agriculture (as practiced today) since: (1) it displaces animals and therefore reduces their chances of survival (maybe less of an issue with urban farming?... but then urbanization doesn't help either...?) ; (2) many products we use today rely on animal byproducts (and synthetics are potentially harmful to humans); and, (3) a varied diet as close to as found in nature (seasonal as well?) benefits the individual (dietary flexibility etc.) and their environment by allowing soil quality to regenerate and trophic levels to remain in balance (as exemplified in "How Wolves Change Rivers"). Food for thought:

Cool beans! (I guess we could call that "David After Dentist" logic.)

Another article discussing the Scottish Secession Movement and "going where you're treated best" (until there is an actual free society at least?): http://nomadcapitalist.com/2014/09/19/scottish-independence-life-petri-dish/?utm_campaign=Nomad+Capitalist&utm_content=%5B%5Brssitem_title%5D%5D&utm_medium=email&utm_source=getresponse&utm_term=Daily+Newsletter Also relevant: http://nomadcapitalist.com/2014/04/24/countries-secession-movements-from-government/ http://nomadcapitalist.com/2013/07/23/why-i-prefer-small-countries-and-limited-government/

I like the use of canary as a symbol of freedom as well. (flight, nest building, needing a workable understanding of physics in order to fly, etc...) Y'know, "Anarcho-Canary" has a rather musical quality to it. (Many canaries are yellow and black too, though, it doesn't have the same emphasis on appealing to ethics.)

I do not see that we disagree in this regard (paraphrasing I presume?): that a belief itself does not influence reality directly, only the behaviors of those acting on those beliefs. To the rational individual, belief is hypothesis (requiring proof and certainty before meriting integration). Thank you for your clarification.

Very clear and concise. With regard to belief influencing reality: does it not have any indirect influence on reality? Belief in a state may not create a state on its own, but indirectly, wouldn't people acting out there lives with the belief in a state support the experience, even if it is still an illusion? Can beliefs act as catalysts for scientific and artistic developments, changing the way we perceive and interact with the world (economy)? Likewise, isn't our belief in the non-aggression principle, self agency, and universally preferable behavior, etc., influencing us into leading more peaceful relationships and lives?

Regarding metaphor: One interpretation I've found for the definition of metaphor as "a vehicle for meaning" implies a prerequisite connection. Since meaning is produced from the interaction of author, medium, and receiver (with most mediums as imperfect conductors), a metaphor can be lost in translation and/or perhaps spontaneously generated at the receiving end of communication. In Ed, Edd, and Eddy, the purgatory theory could've been generated solely at the receiving end if unintended by the author(s); or, the purgatory metaphor could've been a subliminal reproduction of the author(s) subconscious mind packaged within the animation and received by the audiences' subconscious mind where it might resonate and become recognized also by aware conscious minds. Likewise, your introspection could be interpreted as a communication between your subconscious and conscious minds where metaphor and the senses (subjective and objective) act as the medium. (Your conscious mind asks a question; your subconscious mind responds with an image, metaphor, and/or emotion. Your subconscious mind triggers the biological warning system; your conscious mind concludes the stranger ahead is best to be avoided and plans an alternate route.)

Yep. And I can relate to the feeling/situation with your mom (for me, my father). But, I recognize that you had your wits about you here: https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/41385-child-abuse-intervention-this-time-at-my-job/ There was a common saying in my improv troupe to "follow the fear" (or even better, chase it!) because that is where you will find your vulnerability; In this state, you can move through the fight/flight/freeze mechanism to respond with a heightened awareness; and of course, this is best practiced in a safe environment like a stage, dojo, or therapists office (or even in lucid dreaming?). It kinda follows the idea that we learn the most about ourselves and others through conflict, even if that conflict is a simulation. That's one of the benefits I (and I presume others here) find to reading your posts and topics, you're sharing your experience(s) that, even though they're in the past, I'm able to also experience (as simulation), exercising my empathy and problem solving skills for what I would do in that situation, albeit with considerable psychical distance. Thank you.

Nice one! On a similar note, happiness can be both subjective and objective: Brain scans of an individual experiencing joy and happiness light up, yet a person can try to replicate the phenomenon with substances and then interpret that as happiness.

Great job Waleed!

Thank you Thought Terrorist. Do you happen to know what countries are the most free (least laws, freest market, least violence, highest prosperity, etc.) since it is, for the most part, functionally impossible to live stateless in the world today?

Another article related to citizenship and second passports: http://nomadcapitalist.com/2014/09/12/second-citizenships-can-get-marrying-a-foreigner/?utm_campaign=Nomad+Capitalist&utm_content=%5B%5Brssitem_title%5D%5D&utm_medium=email&utm_source=getresponse&utm_term=Daily+Newsletter

Does anyone have first-hand information about (experience) living state-less (without citizenship to any country), and what that entails?

Another reason to get a second passport, eh? (Though it would be nice if we didn't need them to begin with...)

More info on fee hikes: http://nomadcapitalist.com/2014/09/10/how-to-renew-a-us-passport-circumcision/?utm_campaign=Nomad+Capitalist&utm_content=%5B%5Brssitem_title%5D%5D&utm_medium=email&utm_source=getresponse&utm_term=Daily+Newsletter

Thank you for the heads up, I changed it back.

Shoulda gone to Hogwarts, eh? This guy gets it. If you want to be a world-class chef, go learn from a world-class chef. It sounds like that's what you're doing with going to a top-notch economics school; considered top-notch because of the experienced professors, engaged student body, and available resources/reputation I hope. If economics is your passion, go talk to some economists. Conferences, introductions from friends, telecommunication, even while in school, associate yourself with the peers of your choosing. It also sounds like you've got a foundation of self-study so you'll have the ability to converse intelligibly. You have the sense to transplant yourself into better conditions to avoid withering; do you know what it takes to thrive in your chosen field?

A couple of things to consider: What would you want to do if you knew you could not fail? You can be specific, general, or even just focus on how you would want to feel in accomplishing this, as of yet unknown, quest. If you know specifically what business you want to start etc., then look for examples of people (living or deceased) who have/do/have done what you want to do/have. If they can do it, then so can you. If they went to school, then that may be the way to go. Get a hold of them and talk to them directly for their advice and/or read what they (and others) have written. If you only know generally what you want to do/have, then set smaller short-term goals to try things out. Having tried a semester already is a great example. Decide what you liked and did not like about the experience and trust yourself to follow with an informed decision that is a perfect fit for you. If you only have a general feeling or fair certainty for what you want, than follow that feeling to focus your lens, for what you focus on most becomes what you find in your future. I hope that helps.

In improv, what often generates the biggest laughs and cheers are not jokes and silly antics, but spontaneous discoveries made by allowing oneself to be vulnerable and trust their and their partner(s) sub-conscious to play the scene in the present. I agree with the linked articles in descriptions of (soft) power in honesty (vulnerability). It's similar to how flexibility can be improved by stretching, and the ease of mobility is likely to aid in one's quality of life. Thank you for posting the links!

So even past a misunderstanding, there's still a matter of ego, efficiency, and efficacy. And by alpha traits, we're talking about leadership, charisma, and integrity?

In support of your post, the brain acts as a transmitter and receiver of frequencies. The analogy you used of tuning seems apt.

Thanks for the post. I saw this on your #GamerGate topic reply post and found it helpful in clarifying alpha-beta and male-female dynamics in this topic. I always pictured someone like Henry Reardon from Atlas Shrugged as an alpha example, "alpha" as another word for leader. In my case, I grew up with the abundance mentality described in the video, having attended a high school with a significantly higher female demographic. In the links you posted, there's a differentiation between "alpha cads" and "the man who just gets it" (true alpha). Maybe that's where the controversy comes from, a misunderstanding?

It is challenging! In improv, one of the goals is to actively bypass your slower thinking mind (and doubts) and perform with your faster (and arguably more honest) feeling mind ("neurons of the heart"). If you've seen that Inside the Actors Studio interview with Robin Williams where he is asked about his quick wit, there is profound truth behind his antics: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGhfxKUH80M#t=58 The first time I watched it I got lost in the humor of his performance and forgot the question he was answering, but he is answering the original question, as well as (I feel) revealing how he connects to others, otherwise non-receptive (like his mother), through comedy. He's speaking from his sub-conscious to the sub-conscious of the audience members to bypass the barriers of their conscious thinking minds. In contrast, I recognize many of the callers to Freedomain Radio struggle to respond, and I connect this to the defenses of the conscious mind; this is probably why Stefan Molyneux brings to a caller's attention if and how oddly unemotional their responses are when they discuss an experience. With regards to relating feelings and the heart snab, I can relate that to improv (and conversation) as well: In improv, there is a golden rule called "yes, and..." where you agree with what you or your partner(s) in the scene introduce and embellish. They, in turn, agree to the new information and further embellish. It is a mutual give and take relationship. A corollary to "yes, and..." is the "agree to disagree" where an apparent denial is actually an agreement (for example: "Did you take a cookie from the cookie jar?" "Noooo...." *swallows* ). Outright disagreement breaks down a scene in two ways, (1) it negates the information introduced and disengages an audience by opening questions of credibility, and (2) withers trust between the performers whom, as implied beforehand, both agreed to enter into a scene together. This is where I feel that heart pain, a form of betrayal. If I were selling the product at Costco and this couple came up to me, I imagine I would feel this as well because it is implied that I am here to help by informing and selling a valuable product, but rather than agree or agree to disagree, the couple outright negate what I'm introducing to the "scene" by (1) questioning my credibility (in an accusatory rather than curious and open manner), and (2) withering any baseline level of trust prerequisite for conducting business. At this point, I wouldn't feel any mutual give-and-take and wouldn't want to play with them anymore. I'll also mention an added benefit in improv that mirrors what happens in good conversation outside of a scene: There's this concept called a "master mind" (or "the beast") which only occurs when all parties are in agreement (or agreeing to disagree etc.) where each member is highly sensitive (empathizing) to others and can almost read each other's minds. In a scene, this heightened awareness produces the illusion of pre-planned choreography and/or dialogue to the audience (like when a sports team is in the zone), and outside of a scene, we're more likely to make connections and remember things, people, and experiences applicable to the conversation and/or task at hand. I would liken improv to another kind of therapy for the subconscious mind that at times can feel like a waking dream.